Time Addicts

For a film about smoking pipes and travelling through time it was proper entertaining. Anyone upset about the dialogue or swearing clearly hasn't hung out with Aussie junkies and that's disappointing. These people are the salt of the earth....literally....they'll harvest salt from the ocean for a point. The male lead (Charles) was fantastic with a Captain Jack Sparrow-esque performance if he was drinking tinnies and grew up in housing commish. Anyway, smoke a bowl and enjoy a weird journey into the niche cookery of meth subculture in Melbourne, Australia. And if you hate it, go and watch the latest marvel movie for the 12th time.

I watched this movie on a Friday night on Netflix. It was slow to start but when the story picked up I was hooked.

Good movie to watch alone or with friends. This feels like an independent movie and also shot in Australia, near to where I live.

Mixing time travel and drug addiction with a satisfying ending make it worth a watch.

The camera work and background score complements the pacing and mood of the film. The director has kept his shots to sustain longer which adds to the unpredictablility in the screenplay and action. With no big stars the movie still makes it a worthy watch.

Popular Hollywood science fiction movies are edited to give a pacy feel. Time Addicts works more like an art movie than commercial film for me.

Definitely worth a watch.

First, i suggest you go in blind, or immediately after the trailer, and watch at least until they get to the house. I almost turned it off before that and I'm so glad I didn't.

This is a film that I thought would be a typical British sci-fi comedy, if there is such a thing. I thought it would lean more towards humor like "Frequently Asked Questions About Time Travel", but this is a pretty serious movie with some well thought out implications. I actually like this better than "Frequently asked Questions...", although it does have some similarities. Without spoiling anything I will tell you that this too occurs in one primary location, and this too has multiple versions, or multiple timelines piling on top of each other.

If you are looking for a good watch that is sci-fi-ish, time travel, then you've got it. I couldn't find a version with captions, and I would have appreciated that in certain parts that are a bit hard to make out, but other than that this was a good flick.

I caught a screening of Time Addicts at Monster Fest this October. I saw a film which was lovingly crafted by people with a true passion for cinema, and a movie that was, for the most part, very technically proficient. The cinematography in particular was particularly solid, though the occasional shot did linger for too long a time. And the cast did a very strong job making their characters reasonably believable.

Unfortunately, I also saw a film which agitated me in a number of ways, and most of this came down to the screenplay.

Time Addicts is a film which tries to balance a real Aussie sense of humour with another attempt to be a serious thriller about drug addiction, paranoia and time travel. The film plays out very seriously but every line of dialogue is overly aggressive in its effort to be comedic banter and never feels like an organic line of dialogue, even with a cast that play it off very naturally.

In a respectable effort to keep the film contained to a single location, Time Addicts drags out its scenes for too long at a time and stretches its thin premise for a long time and often with a very slow pace. As such, the momentum never really feels like it kicks off. It often feels like writer-director Sam Odlum saw the 2019 time travel movie "Synchronic", another movie about a drug that makes people travel through time, and thought to himself "I would tell that story differently". He has some decent ambitions and exhibits sense of visual style in doing so, but he fails to find the narrative momentum to make a compelling story out of it. Time Addicts is certainly not a predictable film as it goes in a number of directions one might not anticipate, but I found it was often directions that were too ridiculous for me to believe on any level, even in a story where I can suspend disbelief enough to accept a drug that creates time travel. Whilst Synchronic explored way more possibilities, and naturally had a higher budget to allow it to do so, Time Addicts constantly had me very aware that we were inside a single location in the present day, and not in the past or the future as the story would want you to believe. And with very few characters in the story, the empty backgrounds of the same reused house were constantly on display. I respect that this film wanted to make use of a single location, but I ultimately wasn't captivated enough by the story or the script to take my attention away from this.

Ultimately, the biggest problem lies with the protagonist, who is ironically and unironically the antagonist of the film at the same time. Charles Grounds portrays Johnny very believably, even too believably for a character whose dialogue is inorganic and desperate to be funny. He was so believable that he actually reminded me of two people I've met in life my life, let's call them "Luke" and "Trevor". Luke was a paranoid meth addict I knew and eventually began to despise for his constant mistreatment of my friend whom he kept in a toxic relationship. And like Trevor, Grounds' character Johnny drags his girlfriend into the entire ordeal of the movie through his selfish habits. Supposedly, I'm meant to have a fraction of concern for his well-being. But like his real life counterpart "Luke", why should I care about this guy? He's selfish and genuinely unlikable as a person. If anything, I should want him to suffer at the hands of the drug dealer threatening to sever his thumbs. And I do. If Charles got his thumbs cut off in the first ten minutes of the film, then I'd be a happier person. Instead I sat through a lot of long, slow sequences where he was the only one talking, or one of the visibly few characters in the universe of the film. But the real issue came from the fact that every line of dialogue he said felt like it was meant to be the punchline in an episode of "The Big Lez Show" without any sense of believability, or genuine laughter. The audience around me chuckled quite a lot and enjoyed the sense of humour, so there is certainly an audience for it (and it was a sold out theatre too, so it was an inspired and large audience) but I wasn't that audience. I honestly just wished he would shut his drug-induced mouth. That's the same thought I had about my friend "Trevor" the last time he took three tabs of Acid. I just wished he'd shut up, but to his credit there was at least a rhythm to what he was saying, something that Johnny was lacking. Johnny is a poorly written character with a great actor who makes him so believable that it's often unbearable, but to have him written to be so intentionally unlikable and have him constantly say dialogue so artificial and annoying that it's like a cheese grater to the ear, it was not a comfortable experience to have to sit through a feature length runtime trapped in a cinema with him.

Ultimately, I failed to see the film all the way through. About halfway through, poised between remaining in a cinema with a character I couldn't stand and a movie that barely moved, I made the decision to get up and leave. I tried my best to see it through, but I didn't want to spend any more time with an agitating drug addict that would neither capture my sympathy nor make me laugh at any point. I wanted to support the filmmaker because he showed a lot of merit as a director and a knack for keeping a budgetary production as one with solid technical flare, as well as for the fact that it's not fair to judge a film completely unless you've seen it all the way through. All that being said, without a protagonist I could bear to be around I just found myself wanting to get out of the cinema quickly, no matter how many times I said to myself "just give it a chance".

Time Bandits is definitely a step in the right direction for Sam Odlum and I look forward to seeing where he goes from here. With more attention to tonal balance, likeable characters and believable dialogue, I can see his full potential blossoming into something great. I hope his sophomore effort takes everything that worked about this film and grows in a number of ways I felt this one came up short.

I randomly picked this movie to watch and I don't usually do so because it's a gamble. You don't know whether you will be wasting your time (no pun intended) or is going to turn out to be good. This movie turned out to be decent. It's not totally predictable so it will be even more boring but it's not marvelous either. The reason for this probably is because of the: 1. Acting: While the acting wasn't so bad the only bad thing about this turned out to be some scenes when the actors "over-acted" didn't give the feel of an organic, natural way that a sane person would do. This was the boring part as it was pretty predictable what they were going to do... Pick the job, smoke some crack, do some woo woo stuff and get back where it all started. Well, kind of.

2. The Topic.

Time Travel movies have been out since people figured out green screens and the digital cameras shot in a better resolution and I'm not gonna lie, it's getting a little boring. Not with the topic itself but the way it is treated, it is developed and how it ends. This movie however was unique in it's own way (or so I think due to the fact that I haven't seen too many time travel movies).

3. Probably had a budget limit: I'm not talking about the resolution and the actors but it felt like it came from a movie startup, even if it did they did a good job. It wasn't on the Hollywood Standards and that's okay but that's how it felt.

For me it wasn't a complete waste of time. I enjoyed it beyond time travel things and thing that it did best, it kept me entertained ngl. I give this movie a solid 6.5 out of 10. I'm sure they can do better.